• @Treczoks
      link
      31 year ago

      While Ranked Pairs sound good in theory, how would you actually sell this method to normal people? Transparency is one of the basic requirements for the acceptability of a vote, and this method will be beyond maybe 70-80% of the American public, if not more.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          1
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Well, a lot of them don’t really understand the current system either.

          What is important is how are you, as a voter, gonna vote for the person you want to win. In the end, it’s either choose one or rank them from top to bottom.

          What could be the problem is tallying several million individual votes, let alone putting them into a computer. I wonder what the algorithmic complexity is for this system.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        0
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        There are voting methods hard to explain, this one is quite easy: “the winner must win against most of the other candidates on a 1x1 comparison”

        And to avoid making n² voting rounds, we rank our preferences, the first beats all, the second beats all but the first…

        • @Treczoks
          link
          11 year ago

          Still overly complicated, especially for American minds who have been trimmed for decades to rate anything scientific as work of the devil…

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      11 year ago

      Any ranked choice voting system is subject to Arrow’s theorem; range/score/approval voting would be more effective.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        11 year ago

        “more effective” depends on which criteria you value for your voting system to have.

        I value the Condorcet Winner, majority and independence of clones criteria.